why the USA are not a democracy?

Originally posted by Cywr In the Anglo-Saxon type of government there are two or three dominant - traditional parties. Ex: Republicans - Democrats or Conservatives-liberals-workers' party. There is nothing exclusicly 'Anglo-Saxon' about that.

While that's true in principle, de facto the Anglo-Saxon countries do tend to have two parties that alternate in power, in the US since the 1860s and in the UK since the 1920s (and before that you can go back to the 18th century).

Perhaps it should be put more broadly, saying that countries that inherited their political traditions from Britain tend to have two parties (including Ireland and India for instance). It's not just ex-colonies: two-party Germany and Japan copied the UK in their post-WWII constitutions.

I'm not sure why this should be. I guess it would make a thread on its own.

 

 

I'm not sure they did, Germany has largely been coalition governments, so it is i think, a bad example. France is a good one though, it has for the msot part been dominated by two major parties.
But this is popularism, nothing to do with 'Anglo-Saxon' crap.
And India isn't a two party system in the vein of the US, or of the UK (which differes from the US in that those two dominant parties fluctuate) for that matter, it has a much stronger regional influence which means that major parties often have to form coalitions with smaller ones in order to gain government.

By the way, this "Anglo-Saxon (or Anglo-American) tradition" notion is used in the comperative government courses of political science departments...

In France, non-mainstream parties can be effective from time to time but in US and UK this isn't the case...

In local government they can, and in Parliament you have the lib-dems, as well as the regional parties (Wales, Scotland and N.Ireland), which you don't have in the US.

By the way, this "Anglo-Saxon (or Anglo-American) tradition" notion is used in the comperative government courses of political science departments...

Strange then that i was taught about the difference between the US Execetive Democracy, and the British Parliamentry Model, in such a Political Economy course.

Are you running a promo for everything.com there?

Originally posted by Cywr In France, non-mainstream parties can be effective from time to time but in US and UK this isn't the case... In local government they can, and in Parliament you have the lib-dems, as well as the regional parties (Wales, Scotland and N.Ireland), which you don't have in the US. By the way, this "Anglo-Saxon (or Anglo-American) tradition" notion is used in the comperative government courses of political science departments... Strange then that i was taught about the difference between the US Execetive Democracy, and the British Parliamentry Model, in such a Political Economy course.

Of course there are many differences. At least UK is a kingdom! Also presidency, constitution issue (no written constitution in the UK), etc.  You know, it's just a rough classification... US and UK usually have some different ways of doing something. Just an example: the social sciences. For instance, they rely more on statistical data rather than theoretical comments, etc... But you know all these classifications are rough. I don't see much difference between the styles of representative liberal democracy. I explained my reasons before... 

 hmmmmm

Seko !! what did you say?

To be Honest iam one of ITAPEVI's posts biggest fans

 

Originally posted by ITAPEVI PASHA IS sahte AMERIKALI  ����, �����, ����, �����

Did you mean kotumeyil?

If you meant so, What's the relevance? "PASHA IS sahte AMERIKALI" means "pasha is a fake American" and of course I am not! And why do you write in Turkish? I'm really confused!

Originally posted by Cywr I'm not sure they did, Germany has largely been coalition governments, so it is i think, a bad example.

But the coalitions have been some grouping of two major parties and two very minor ones, one of which is very recent. That is in fact also true of the UK, in which the Unionists, for instance, have always been minority partners of the Conservatives.

Minor parties get more play with proportional representation, as I pointed out initially.

France is a good one though, it has for the msot part been dominated by two major parties.

Which two would they be?

These were the results of the last French presidential election (numbers are percentages of votes in the two rounds):

Jacques Chirac - Rally for the Republic	19.9	82.2
Jean-Marie le Pen - National Front	16.9	17.8
Lionel Jospin - Socialist Party	16.2	-
Fran�ois Bayrou -Union for the French Democracy	6.8	-
Arlette Laguiller - Workers' Struggle	5.7	-
Jean-Pierre Chev�nement - Republican Pole	5.3	-
No�l Mam�re - The Greens	5.2	-
Olivier Besancenot - Revolutionary Communist League	4.2	-
Jean Saint-Josse -Hunting, Fishing, Nature, Tradition	4.2	-
Alain Madelin - Liberal Democracy	3.9	-
Robert Hue - French Communist Party	3.4	-
Bruno M�gret - Republican National Movement	2.3	-
Christiane Taubira - Left Radical Party	2.3	-
Corinne Lepage - Citizenship Action Participation for the 21st Century	1.9	-
Christine Boutin - Forum of Social Republicans	1.2	-
Daniel Gluckstein - Workers' Party	0.5	-

Doesn't look much like a two-party system to me.

But this is popularism, nothing to do with 'Anglo-Saxon' crap. And India isn't a two party system in the vein of the US, or of the UK (which differes from the US in that those two dominant parties fluctuate)

They haven't fluctuated in the UK since the US was formed any more than they have in the US. since 1830-odd a minor party has become a major one just once in the US and once in the UK.

for that matter, it has a much stronger regional influence which means that major parties often have to form coalitions with smaller ones in order to gain government.

Yes, but the lead is held always by Congress or the BJP.

 

[QUOTE=Cywr]The two major French parties are the socialist party, and the UMP. Remove le Pen (teh last election was the first time that they gained that degree of popularity), and you have your two main parties though out much of recent French political history.

You are unaware of how the major parties are composed. They are already
> coalitions of different interests. There have already been "coalition
> negotiations" within the major parties to form their policy viewpoints.

I agree...and I could never tell whtehr my major party MP was one of the
stripes I supported...or one if the stripes I did not support.